Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.linux:34738 comp.os.386bsd.questions:1704 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!umn.edu!msus1.msus.edu!msus1.msus.edu!nop Newsgroups: comp.os.linux,comp.os.386bsd.questions Subject: Re: Summary of Linux vs. 386BSD vs. Commercial Unixes Message-ID: <NOP.93Apr17221444@theory.Mankato.MSUS.EDU> From: nop@theory.Mankato.MSUS.EDU (Jay A. Carlson) Date: 17 Apr 93 22:14:44 Reply-To: nop@theory.cs.mankato.msus.edu References: <1993Apr15.225354.18654@samba.oit.unc.edu><1993Apr17.161516.2794@serval.net.ws u.edu><1993Apr17.175431.25015@coe.montana.edu><1993Apr17.190517.4276@serval.net.wsu.edu><1993Apr17.205715.11278@coe.montana.edu> Organization: Mankato State University Nntp-Posting-Host: theory.cs.mankato.msus.edu In-reply-to: nate@cs.montana.edu's message of Sat, 17 Apr 1993 20:57:15 GMTLines: 19 Lines: 19 In article <1993Apr17.205715.11278@coe.montana.edu> nate@cs.montana.edu (Nate Williams) writes: No, my purpose is to make 386BSD completely re-distrubutable, with NO strings attached. That means Sun, DEC, HP, Ren and Stimpy, or whoever can take this code and sell a binary copy of it. The GPL does not allow this. You and I, and your list of luminaries, can sell binary copies of GPL'd code. What you can't do is sell 'em without source availability. The original BSD copyright has been this way, but unfortunately a group of people take the code, fix the code, and then place restrictions on it. How is this worse than, say, DEC fixing the code and not releasing source at all? -- Jay Carlson nop@theory.cs.mankato.msus.edu Flat text is just *never* what you want. ---stephen p spackman